Woolworths Ltd v Sisko

In the case of Woolworths Ltd v Sisko, the respondent, Ms Sisko, sought compensation for psychological injury sustained during her employment with Woolworths. The dispute was adjudicated by the Fair Work Commission and subsequently appealed to the Federal Court of Australia. The primary issue before the Court was whether the Arbitrator's decision on the quantum of compensation was legally sound, particularly in light of the appellant's contention that the Arbitrator improperly relied on evidence from Ms Sisko's treating specialist. Additionally, the Court had to determine whether the Arbitrator correctly assessed Ms Sisko's contributory negligence in exacerbating her psychological injury.

The Court found that the Arbitrator did not err in considering the specialist's evidence as it was relevant to the assessment of Ms Sisko's psychological condition and the impact of her employment on her mental health. The Court dismissed the appellant's challenge to the factual findings, affirming that the Arbitrator's conclusions were supported by the evidence. The Court also rejected the argument that Ms Sisko's contributory negligence was a substantial contributing factor to her injury, finding that the Arbitrator's assessment of her negligence was not unreasonable.

The Court confirmed the Arbitrator's decision on the quantum of compensation, subject to certain amendments to the figures to reflect accurate weekly rates. The matter was remitted to an Arbitrator for the determination of Ms Sisko's entitlement to weekly compensation from 1 January 2013. Finally, the Court ordered the appellant to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.